we have a criminal defense attorney and a former federal prosecutor. shannon laid that out really great for us, easy to understand a complicated case. the question is whether or not if basically you are in a state that has not set up its own exchange, if the federal government works instead of that and you can still get your subsidies, the big question in the wording. those enrolled through an exchange established by this state gets a subsidy. that's what the word says. do they have a case? >> do they have a case? i'm going to tell you something. this case could be a slam dunk. it's very simple. when you talk about interpreting a statute, jenna, the words of the statute control and the words of the statute define in exchange set up by a state and they authorize subsidies as defined in the statute. this is the irony of this. law presumes that congress knew what they were doing when they passed a statute. that's the end of the conversation. jenna: but as shannon pointed out, what the government is saying is we all know what the law meant. it meant to say